MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100028483 · doi:10.1139/p07-173

Charge and state population in dilute plasmas from beam-foil spectroscopy

2008· article· en· W2100028483 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christopher T. Chantler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAtomic physicsSpectroscopyFOIL methodRydberg formulaBeam (structure)PopulationRadiative transferElectronCharge (physics)Spectral resolutionSpectral lineComputational physicsIonizationIonNuclear physicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beam-foil spectroscopy has a long history for determining charge state evolution, radiative decay lifetimes, spectral widths, and satellite structure. Many theoretical results predict a range of populations and state dependencies, but high resolution or a very large bandpass is normally required to test or investigate these. The current investigation has tested some key assumptions and models as applied to this relativistic regime, particularly for few-electron iron resonances and satellites. We conclude that there are two specific production mechanisms, one inside the target to low-n levels and one dominated by capture mechanisms at the exit of the foil, with particularly significant Rydberg cascades. Several systematics in high-precision measurements of these systems are discussed and quantified for the first time. The 2s–1s and 4f–2p satellites are explicitly investigated, and a dominant systematic is uncovered that is due to the variable location of spectral emission, downstream of the beam-foil target. PACS Nos.: 32.70.Jz, 34.10.+x, 52.20.Hv, 34.60.+z

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207